Ok, so assuming that the above is all correct and complete, I have everything I need to create the code.

Hi Reyth. If you could create a code for all those things, that would be awesome! WOW. I did not know it would be possible, because it seems too complicated.

Everything you mentioned in your post, for clarification, is correct. The only thing I would suggest adding to your code, for each user individually, is a LIMIT in units. For example, I always limit each game of 100-200 spins to a maximum of a 100 unit loss. (I never forgot ONE game where I had a streak from hell and was down over 2500 units - using Palestis's original method and progression, not mine). It would be nice if the user can add his OWN limit in there, depending on what he's comfortable with. Or even NO limit. So, when your code DOES reach a unit loss limit, it will stop there and start a new sequence. This also is more reality based, as nobody has an unlimited bankroll.

I know this code would be time consuming to create, but I really think it would be worth it. I have been experimenting with this method for so long now, that I really believe it has potential. I have tested over 12,000 spins so far, MANUALLY, and the results are more impressive than any other roulette method, by FAR.

If anyone would like to see a SUMMERY of all these results, I'd be happy to attach it to my next post.

Thanks again, Reyth for your willingness to create this code. I still work every day on improving this method. Maybe your code would help me do analysis even further.

For example, for those with a SMALL bankroll, I have found a progression which works GREAT for not busting easily during a bad streak. It's called the Bread Winner. No need to change it from the original method (even though it's for EC bets). The profits are cut in HALF from what the 2X Divisor progression can win, but the odds of busing are drastically reduced (I busted zero times in 80 games totaling 12,000 spins). This bread winner would be good for BUILDING a proper bankroll. Then once that bankroll is achieved, move on to a more productive progression in which you can sustain several busts.

I wonder if this system works on rng or airball though. Anyone could clarify?

I've been reading on roulette for a couple of months, however I didn't lay my hands down yet been thinking hard with my brains about the inside bets of numbers for quite bit of time trying to figure out my best before going for anything real or sharing though. Anything of numbers selections and dozen are worth the time, the rest are waste of time. Anyway great single dozen system palestis!

Hi windally, I have used the " odd dozen" extensively on air ball and RNG. The question is "can you trust RNG" ? Note I do play slightly differently than Palestis. I believe that my style of play is more suited to airball than Pale's. This system relies on 2 basic principles. (1) The fact that one dozen is often "sleeping" and is therefor out of play. (2)The flow, "Regression toward the mean", is still trying to maintain equality with the 2 dozens that are in play. Harry

Hello to all and Senior members of this great forum. I became a member when new dozen system by Mr. Palestis was trending. I became fascinated and still studying it.However, my contribution to this great system is on how to select a trigger dozen. I find it easy and suitably compliant to search for a trigger in every 3 spins especially where there're no three or more consecutive dozens, a 0,0 before the trigger. Where a zero comes before, after or in between the three spins is counted not as a trigger but to complete the three spins and move on. Suprisingly, and in compliance with Mr. Palestis red flag rules, I have seen only three back to back losses scattered in about 10,000 spins actually played online at a British casino.I will like the experts in the house to examine and critic this selection method of mine for optimal results. My special thanks to Mr. Palestis and thank you allAkanni

I transmitted a sequence which occurred one after another without a break to where I stopped for an illustration. 6 34 32 is a trigger which is followed by 32 29, according to Palestis you do not bet the 3rd(xyy and followed by yy. I used this method since I don't know where to start looking for a trigger after one ends betting an existing trigger.In my case, where I identify a trigger, I bet 3 times and terminates betting win or lose to count 3 spins waiting for a trigger within the 3 spins in the sequence.

I think you separate triggers with a forward slash. Then you indicate the target dozen with #. 32-31-7- is a trigger and with 10 after that it wins in the first bet. Then in the next series there is no trigger because either the 3 prior spins were in the same dozen as the target dozen or if a 0 is involved. And if after YXX trigger the first 2 spins is XX again, then you skip the 3rd bet. Is that what you mean? Which happened in the case of 6-34-32 and then 32 , 29 came. In my tests too, I usually find only 3 back to back losses and they only happen kind of rarely. You probably also noticed that whenever you run into 3 back to back losses ( and also 2), there are more consecutive wins after that. The way I play it is to let the first trigger lose VIRTUALLY and then only play 2 triggers after that. if there is only 2 back to back losses ( the virtually lost trigger inclusive), you recover and win. If there is 3 back to back losses (including the first virtually lost trigger), you only lose 2 triggers. Then you stop until the next trigger wins. That way you avoid actually losing 3 triggers in a row (or more if they ever decide to happen).Once the bad sequence is broken by a winning trigger, it is extremely rare to have another bad sequence of 3+ losing consecutive triggers, following that win. Using the virtual loss mode is ideal for a live roulette B+M casino where you have several roulettes in sight. One of those roulettes might have a trigger formed in its last 3 numbers. In that case you wait for the next 3 spins to lose. In another roulette you might se something like 5-7-32-16-3.5-7-32 being the trigger, it has already lost the first 2 spins with 16-13. One more lost spin and the entire trigger has lost virtually because you did not play. Then proceed to bet the next trigger that will show up. Another roulette might have 5-7-32-16-3-20-17-30. it means the 5-7-32 trigger already lost 3 times with 16-3-20. In that case you can go back one number and use 20-17-30 as the next playable trigger. There are many possibilities when you observe several roulettes. But you have to practice some back tracking to become an expert in working backwards.

I transmitted a sequence which occurred one after another without a break to where I stopped for an illustration. 6 34 32 is a trigger which is followed by 32 29, according to Palestis you do not bet the 3rd(xyy and followed by yy. I used this method since I don't know where to start looking for a trigger after one ends betting an existing trigger.In my case, where I identify a trigger, I bet 3 times and terminates betting win or lose to count 3 spins waiting for a trigger within the 3 spins in the sequence.

Thanks God.Good Morning All.

Thank you Palestis and other members who has given this system and their inputs.Thank you Akanni for sharing, I have figured it out a long before and exactly playing Akanni's way and have fantastic results so far. Key is a good bankroll and virtual losses.

Hi windally, I have used the " odd dozen" extensively on air ball and RNG. The question is "can you trust RNG" ? Note I do play slightly differently than Palestis. I believe that my style of play is more suited to airball than Pale's. This system relies on 2 basic principles. (1) The fact that one dozen is often "sleeping" and is therefor out of play. (2)The flow, "Regression toward the mean", is still trying to maintain equality with the 2 dozens that are in play. Harry

I wouldn't really trust RNG though. I don't really understand, maybe you would wanna share full detail on your style of play? That would be great!

Do you guys think if casinos find out that more and more players are adapting this method/system of playing plus winning on a constant basis that they will eventually ban us ? I mean if i think of it, don't you guys think casino staff members will go on the web and look for websites/forums like these and find a way to prevent us from winning ? (especially if it's consistent and recognizing this play-style).